SMU statement distorts climate science, prejudicial

This statement is not based on science and has nothing to do with science education. It appears to be a prejudiced statement where words like “deniers” are the hammer. The important question is not whether there is “equal time” but whether science is being presented rather than conjecture. Honest scientific debate is legitimate and healthy. But statements such as that below are counterproductive.

“We found that climate change is presented as a controversial debate stemming from differing opinions,” said Román, an assistant professor in the Department of Teaching and Learning in the SMU Simmons School. “Climate skeptics and climate deniers are given equal time and treated with equal weight as scientists and scientific facts — even though scientists who refute global warming total a miniscule number.”